Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited v Ainsworth Game Technology Limited [2018] FCA 1511

Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited v Ainsworth Game Technology Limited [2018] FCA 1511

Aristocrat satisfied r 7.23 for the disputed categories. It reasonably believed that it may have claims arising from Ainsworth's representations about Jackpot Strike and the possible use of Aristocrat confidential information in the development of Jackpot Strike, and it lacked sufficient information to decide whether to commence proceedings. Ainsworth's proposed confidential summary would not reveal the specific representations made or the nature and extent of possible relief, and Mr Greenslade's declaration was of little weight because it did not disclose the inquiries made. Evidence that Mr Prabhu accessed confidential Lightning Link materials, was involved in Jackpot Strike, and that...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Preliminary Discovery Under R 7.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth) / Amended Originating Application for Preliminary Discovery; Reasons for Judgment and Orders for Agreed Minute and Costs Submissions
Outcome
Orders for preliminary discovery should be made in respect of each category sought in Aristocrat's amended originating application; parties were directed to provide an agreed minute and costs were to be addressed by short written submissions on the papers.
Legal Topics
['preliminary Discovery' 'federal Court Rules 2011 (cth) R 7.23' 'electronic Gaming Machines' 'copyright Infringement' 'misuse of Confidential Information' 'false or Misleading Representations' 'hearsay Evidence in Interlocutory Proceedings' 'confidentiality Orders']
['practice and Procedure' 'intellectual Property' 'copyright' 'confidential Information' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct'] ['preliminary Discovery' 'federal Court Rules 2011 (cth) R 7.23' 'electronic Gaming Machines' 'copyright Infringement' 'misuse of Confidential Information' 'false or Misleading Representations' 'hearsay Evidence in Interlocutory Proceedings' 'confidentiality Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Preliminary Discovery Under R 7.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (cth) / Amended Originating Application for Preliminary Discovery; Reasons for Judgment and Orders for Agreed Minute and Costs Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Aristocrat reasonably believed that it may have the right to obtain relief from Ainsworth in respect of misuse of confidential information, copyright infringement, misleading or deceptive conduct, false representations, breach of contract or inducing breach of contract.' 'Whether Aristocrat, after making reasonable inquiries, lacked sufficient information to decide whether to start a proceeding against Ainsworth.' 'Whether Ainsworth had or was likely to have had documents directly relevant to whether Aristocrat had a right to obtain relief and whether inspection would assist Aristocrat in deciding whether to commence proceedings.' 'Whether preliminary discovery should be ordered for categories 4(a), 5, 6 and 7, and how access to category 2 documents should be addressed.' 'Whether a statutory declaration annexed to affidavit evidence should be received despite hearsay and s 135 objections.']

Ratio Decidendi

Aristocrat satisfied r 7.23 for the disputed categories. It reasonably believed that it may have claims arising from Ainsworth's representations about Jackpot Strike and the possible use of Aristocrat confidential information in the development of Jackpot Strike, and it lacked sufficient information to decide whether to commence proceedings. Ainsworth's proposed confidential summary would not reveal the specific representations made or the nature and extent of possible relief, and Mr Greenslade's declaration was of little weight because it did not disclose the inquiries made. Evidence that Mr Prabhu accessed confidential Lightning Link materials, was involved in Jackpot Strike, and that...

Court Disposition

Orders for preliminary discovery should be made in respect of each category sought in Aristocrat's amended originating application; parties were directed to provide an agreed minute and costs were to be addressed by short written submissions on the papers.

Orders

  • ['The parties provide by 4.00 pm on 18 October 2018 an agreed minute of the orders to be made that will give effect to the findings and conclusions expressed in the reasons published today as Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited v Ainsworth Game Technology [2018] FCA 1511.' 'The prospective applicant file...